Ukraine Crisis Gets Uglier and More Dangerous
9 Mar 2022
BUCK: This is on the Daily Mail right now, for example โ Putinโs hospital atrocity. I mean, you are seeing the awfulness of war and people are becoming more emotionally involved in the desire to do something in Ukraine. What does this mean if Putin starts to lose? Here is a nuclear weapons author Joe Cirincione saying if Putin starts losing, the risk grows.
CIRINCIONE: Thatโs the danger, ironically. If he is losing the war, the nuclear risks grow. The stakes for him become very high and he may feel like a gambler at the table whoโs losing his hand. Heโs just gonna bet the house โ and Russian doctrine does allow for something called โescalate to deescalate,โ to use a nuclear weapon first to try to back off the West if theyโre losing.
โIt is absolutely insane. It is dangerous. Iโm afraid something is going to go horribly wrong,โ says nuclear nonproliferation expert Joseph Cirincione on Russia attacking a Ukrainian nuclear power plant. pic.twitter.com/DBigd4X7ue
โ Brianna Keilar (@brikeilarcnn) March 4, 2022
BUCK: Heโs right about that. That is Russian military doctrine that they will use a nuke as essentially a back-off maneuver if they think theyโre about to lose dramatically, Clay. Weโve gone quite a ways from just a couple of weeks ago where the country seemed very much in favor of nonintervention where now over 70% say they want a no-fly zone.
CLAY: I think this is utterly the danger. The analogy weโve used and I think itโs a good one on this show is the guy who loses the fistfight and maybe Putin is losing the fistfight right now and isnโt happy with the result and the embarrassment that comes with that loss and decides to bring in a knife or a gun or brings in a bunch of more guys to try to exact revenge over what has happened. I also think we should mention, Buck, the situation in Poland.
We talked about that live on the show yesterday, and I think diagnosed what ultimately the State Department ended up coming to that psalm conclusion, which is โ and to reiterate for people out there who may have missed this, the idea was Poland was going to give airplanes, jets, fighter jets, to Ukraine. But they were going to do it by using a base in Germany to make the transfer.
And initially they said, โLook, if they try to do it in Poland then the Russians may well attack those jets before they get airborne,โ and so Poland said, โHey, weโll put those jets in Germany.โ But what you then create is the possibility of Vladimir Putin attacking Germany to try to keep those jets from going into Ukraine and making it to Ukraine airspace. And so what youโre pointing to, Buck, 70% of people may favor a no-fly zone but theyโre probably thinking about the no-fly zone in the context of what happened in Iraq, where we had total air superiority and we werenโt in danger of creating World War III.
I thought Marco Rubio said it well when he said (summarized), โLook, a no-fly zone basically creates the entire situation for World War III to exist,โ and if that were to end up happening, what weโre doing is sort of a slow walk up to potentially an escalating situation where the United States gets officially drawn in. And thatโs the debate we were having yesterday, Buck. At what point does aid become not aid anymore but an actual tacit action to put you in as a combatant? To me, fighter planes feels like itโs pretty close.
BUCK: I think it was last week, Clay, when I said here, โI understand weโre rooting for Ukraine because theyโre the underdogs. Theyโve been invaded, and thereโs all these reports about how strong the resistance has been. The Russian war machine is vicious, it is fierce, and it is gaining ground. They are currently, if you look at it on a map, carving up areas of Ukraine and establishing total control on the ground.โ
Now, itโs not a majority of Ukraine, but thereโs a whole region in the north, a region in the east, and a region in the south where theyโre effectively creating a de facto annexation for the Russian Federation. Thatโs happening right now. Theyโre also increasing the shelling, theyโre increasing the destructiveness that theyโre willing to engage in at this phase, and when weโre talking about a no-fly zone to the point you just made a second ago, it isโฆ
When you put American planes in the sky and you say, โWe will shoot down Russian planes,โ now it just turns into whoโs gonna fire first, because thereโs no way Russian planes and American planes are in no-fly zone and theyโre just flying past each other, nothing happens, right? We know that. So hereโs a former ambassador was actually on MSNBC saying you shouldnโt call it just a no-fly zone. Hereโs what you should call it.
โLetโs just get rid of this euphemism โno-fly zone.โ Letโs call it for what it is โ itโs war,โ former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul urged on @MSNBC. pic.twitter.com/t4cCMxroaF
โ Mediaite (@Mediaite) March 8, 2022
BUCK: That was former U.S. ambassador to Russia for a long time, McFaul โ who Iโll say, is a leftist and something of a loon on things like Trump issues, but on this point, on this issue, Clay? I think what heโs saying is true. I think what heโs saying is right.
CLAY: And also, Buck, it doesnโt even require a conscious decision and intent to shoot down a plane. You know this as well as anybody out there listening to would also. The amount of potential errors that could come into play when youโve got all of these jets flying around over Ukraine, even if there is an attempt to avoid conflict, it virtually is impossible to have that conflict avoidance occur. So, yeah, I think thatโs really where the rubber meets the road.
We have to decide what is our limit in terms of engagement as it pertains to Russia and Ukraine. And so far, to me โ and I donโt know if you agree with this, Buck โ but putting jets, giving jets to Ukrainians and allowing them to take off and pilot those jets feels awfully close to me โ and I donโt know if you agree with me, but Iโm trying to think about it from a Russian, Vladimir Putinโs perspective. Itโs one thing if youโre giving guns. Itโs another thing if youโre giving even the anti-tank apparatus and everything else.
Theoretically, Ukraine could find ways to buy that on the black market. You canโt buy a jet on the black market, right? Like, you canโt just randomly end up with one of these high-powered jets. So there is, to me, a standard where giving armaments goes beyond just, โHey, hereโs some guns, here are some anti-tank missiles, hereโs some Javelin material โ and, oh, by the way, hereโs 20 fighter jets.โ The fighter jets feels to me, Buck, like a pretty substantial acceleration, if Iโm looking at this from a Russia perspective.
BUCK: Well, if they are taking off from bases outside Ukraine โ
CLAY: Yes which they have to be.
BUCK: They initially would be.
CLAY: Yes.
BUCK: I donโt think theyโre gonna draw themโฆ Theyโre not gonna put them on trucks and take this across the border by land. So theyโre gonna fly them inโฆ But if theyโre flying strikes from outside of Ukrainian territory, the Russians are gonna see that as an act. That is an act of war. We need to start using these terms. Thatโs an act of war. If youโre allowing someone to fly planes to do strikes against you, youโre gonna look at that as theyโre a belligerent now. Theyโre in the conflict.
CLAY: Even to your point, you have to start that way, right? Because theyโre not gonna put these things on trains or on big trucks and try to somehow cross the border with the plane on the ground. Like, you have to have them take off with Ukrainian pilots from another country to fly in. That feels to me like, if Iโm Russia, a declaration of war in some ways. Itโs different than bringing guns or bringing these other materials across the border, to me. Do you feel the same way, that that feels like a fairly substantial acceleration?
BUCK: Itโs an escalation for sure, which is why I think the U.S. response to it has been, โWhoa, hold on a second! We didnโt coordinate.โ Yeah. So thereโs clearly something different. Plus, we were already selling armaments. The Chineseโฆ There are people have been selling armaments to Russia. Weโre not about to say weโre at war with them.
But thereโs something more specific and something right, you know, next to the battlefield, so to speak, about allowing the MiGs to be transferred to Ukraine that clearly is raising concerns, raising tensions. And Iโm amazed, Clay, at the people say โ and Iโve seen this now โ โPutinโs not gonna fire nukes if we start shooting his planes out of the sky.โ
CLAY: Yeah.
BUCK: Really?
CLAY: Itโs a big, bold gamble to just be saying that.
BUCK: Think what weโre talking about. Iโm not saying, โOh, the ruble might tank 15% if we start shooting planes out of the sky.โ Itโs, โHe wonโt fire nuclear weapons,โ folks. This is whatโฆ Weโre having this discussion right now. Weโve just come out of a two-year pandemic, and weโre closer in America, at least, to the prospect of a nuclear exchange than, what, any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, probably? Letโs be realistic. When was the last time we were really sitting around saying, โThis feels like it could be wrong and there could be nukes at any momentโ? Itโs been decades, at a minimum.
CLAY: Certainly thirty-five years at least, back to the eighties.
BUCK: Look at how quickly we moved along. Iโm kind of stunned, Clay, by the polling. People say, โBuck, maybe you shouldnโt believe the polling.โ A lot of people, a lot of people on the right are saying, โNo, we need to do this no-fly zone for Ukraine.โ Really? All of a sudden, a no-fly zone? Weโre two weeks into this. And, by the way, what have I been saying?
Itโs gonna get ugly. Forget about the Ghost of Kiev and the beauty queen with her airsoft rifle and all this initial propaganda about the glorious resistance. This is going to turn into hell. Itโs going to look awful. Weโre going to see some of it. Itโs going to be playing on the emotions of everyone whoโs not in the conflict, and you have to think about this stuff rationally and in calculated fashion.
Because miscalculation here, Clay, thatโs the kind of stuff that keeps people up at night. I donโt know what else to say. How much higher can the stakes possibly be than what weโre talking about right now with these decisions about U.S. involvement in Ukraine, which Iโm sitting here saying, โNo, no, no.โ
CLAY: Hereโs a question that I have for you, Buck, and you may know the answer and I donโt know, and I havenโt even seen it covered very much. What kind of protection, missile shield do we have in the event that Putin decided to launch a nuke? Letโs talkโฆ To what extent do we have the knowledge technologically to be able to try to keep one of these things from landing. That used to be talked about a lot in the 1980s and the early nineties when the Cold War was still kind of in conscious thought. I donโt remember having that conversation in 30 years.
BUCK: Iโll pose to you this way, and then weโll bring in somebody who understands the combat on the ground very well, how this stuff goes, Jack Carr, former Navy SEAL. Heโs a sniper, saw combat overseas, heโll be joining us. Best-selling author too. You guys, Iโm sure, read his books. Heโll be joining us in just a few minutes. Clay, I will just say this.
The government that just made us mask up for two years unnecessarily is not a government that I sleep well at night hoping would be able to shoot a nuclear weapon out of the sky in time. Iโm gonna tell you that right now. I donโt know. Iโve been out of the system. Iโve been out of the national security side for a while. So I donโt even know what the current capabilities are, unfortunately, โcause theyโre very, very sensitive and secret. But I donโt sleep well at night thinking that.
Recent Stories
Clay Reacts to Mark Zuckerberg's Blockbuster Admission on Biden Censorship
Clay joined The Story with Martha MacCallum to discuss major Meta news.
Ryan Girdusky Talks About His New Podcast
The latest addition to the C&B Podcast Network roster shares some mind-blowing data.
VIP Video: The Trump Lawfare Is Over
Watch Clay and Buck analyze the spectacular failure of Democrat lawfare.
VIP Video: DEI Has No Place in Fighting Fires
Watch Clay and Buck take stock of the tragedy unfolding in Los Angeles.